Pritchard-Jones, LG (2016) The good, the bad, and the 'vulnerable older adult'. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 38 (1). pp. 51-72.

[img]
Preview
Text
Journal Paper 2 - Final 2.pdf - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (810kB) | Preview

Abstract

Recent declarations by the Court of Appeal indicate that the inherent jurisdiction has survived the implementation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for adults considered ‘vulnerable’ and whose decision-making is threatened by reasons other than mental impairment – such occasions may include instances of elder abuse. In this paper I argue, however, that the post-Mental Capacity Act courts have adopted a confused and outmoded concept of the vulnerable older adult, in particular where decision-making is threatened by abusive interpersonal relationships experienced by an older individual. This has particular implications in terms of the types of remedies imposed by the courts on older adults in such circumstances. In this article I suggest that by being more cognisant of recent more nuanced understandings of vulnerability, the courts may be better suited to identifying, and responding to perceived sources of vulnerability in a way that is more empowering for the older adult.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law on 24 February 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/09649069.2016.1145838
Uncontrolled Keywords: Capacity, decision-making, elder abuse, inherent jurisdiction, older adults, vulnerability
Subjects: K Law > K Law (General)
Divisions: Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences > School of Law
Depositing User: Symplectic
Date Deposited: 20 Apr 2016 16:02
Last Modified: 15 Apr 2019 13:36
URI: http://eprints.keele.ac.uk/id/eprint/1637

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item